Old Fart w/X-Cell 60's

[DavidH]

First, Yes that heli does have SE frames. If it was an original SE then someone removed the rotor head. The rotor head on the SE is all metal.
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/mode...unce/1004.html
Here is a manual for a pre 98 SE. The only difference is the servo tray is different on the SE after 98.
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/se98manual.pdf
Here is the plan sheets
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/se98drawings.pdf

Here is the plan sheets for the 99 SE
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/model/plans/1004991.gif
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/model/plans/1004992.gif
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/model/plans/1004993.gif


As for starting wand. If you got the MA flex shaft starter extension. Then all you have to do is slip it on the clutch shaft when starting the engine. This is the flex shaft
http://www.ronlund.com/Merchant2/mer...ct_Code=MA4684

Get you some fully symetrical 180-185 gram blades. 680-700 mm in length. That heli will do 3D with any of the modern helis out there today. No reason to baby that heli, it is fully capable of anything you can think of to do with it.

David

[Alfred]

I knew you would come to the resque David :-)

[DavidH]

Well over the last 15 years. I have owned at least one of every nitro powered MA heli at one time or another. LOL

David

[RC_Feen]

David....Thanks for the info. From what the previous owner told me the heli started out as a 1003 CT that has many upgrades to make it almost a SE. It does have the metal head but plastic blade grips and plastic tail gear box housing. Pretty much everything is carbon fiber. Thanks for the links for the plans and all the documentation. Any suggestions on what electronics I should use to complete this bird? I plan on installing all new servo's, gyro, receiver and receiver battery. I'll be using my DX7 Tx with the heli. Also if I was to upgrade the tail gear box what would be suggested. This is my first X-Cell so I'm learning as I go but not unfamiliar with setting up helicopters. Thanks again.

[DavidH]

Yes I thought it was a CT. The CT is just like the SE but it has plastic grips on the rotor head. Plus the frames were aluminum. So I would think the previous owner put on the CF frames after repairing from a mishap.

Here is the plan sheets for the CT
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/model/plans/1003ct1.gif
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/model/plans/1003ct2.gif
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/model/plans/1003ct2.gif

The plastic gear box on the model will work just fine. But if your going to change it out. Then I would suggest this gear box.
http://www.miniatureaircraftusa.com/...?prod=123%2D75

The open gear box is a nice setup.

David

[Raven_darkcloud]

So David can you tell what xcell it is I posted pics of?

[Michael211]

Hey Old Fart! X-Cell heli's may not be bleeding edge but they're so well designed that they're still great heli's and can hold their own with just about anything that's been currently released.

A guy I flew with recently was talking about how great his new Trex 600 was, how the engine can be slid down and out from between the frames without splitting the frames.... like this is something new? The MA X-Cell's have been able to do this for many many years already... but he thinks it's an awesome new feature! LMAO!

I fly most often now with an older club member (I'm in my late 30's btw) who flies a Raptor 50. He's always marveling at all the bearings on my X-Cell 60... the Raptor doesn't have near the same quality as these X-Cell's do (too much plastic on plastic IMO).

For X-Cell parts you still have quite a few options online.... http://www.HeliProz.com has a full line of parts as does http://www.helihobby.com/html/MA1.html, and http://www.Ronlund.com (Ron himself still flies an X-Cell 60.... I met him last Fall at the Heli drag races in Crosby Texas). Miniature Aircraft also has an online store where you can buy parts (though they're a little higher on their prices).

For exploded assembly diagrams online for most X-Cell models see: http://rchelibase.com/xcell/

I have 3 X-Cells I've bought over the past 2 1/2 years. The 1st is flying pod-n-boom, the 2nd is going into a scale Airwolf fuselage, and the 3rd which I'm just now starting to assemble will be a night-fly heli (led blades and glowire all over).

I belong to the Jetero R/C club out of Humble, TX... out club field is located just north-east of Houston near Huffman.

Regards and many happy landings ya'll!

- Michael

[Michael211]

ps. I recently changed from 30% nitro to 15% nitro (Coolpower heli fuel)... alot less smoke than in the pictures I attached above. Also cheaper to buy, longer run times (over 18 minutes on a tank now!), and actually alot more power it seems (my OS 61 SX-WC engine is more optimized for 15% nitro than it was for 30% nitro).

Regards!

- Michael

[CSWHITING]

I too am a fan of Xcell I have a New ion x2 awesome power and a partialy rebuilt pro 2k which should be airbourne soon. My other xl 60 with bent frame is now a Pro 2k fly great lots of power and many at field dont know what they are looking at..

get em flying.....

C-

[malleeman]

hi there would anyone here have setup videos for the schooner xcell 1001 60 series wooden tray version or a w/site on build and setups for them.
cheers

[DavidH]

Here is the plan sheet that shows how the wood servo tray is setup.
http://www.rchelibase.com/xcell/model/plans/1001872.jpg

David

[JohnLund]

This one should be up and running again for the first time since about '92, when Ron gets back from IRCHA.

[Michael211]

Clean machine John! I'm not sure about that single tail-strut design though... it doesn't seem to me like it would support the tail well in a hard stop. Modern gyro's are A LOT harder on the tail than what was available in 1992. If you can, I think it'd be a good idea to put a pair of tail-struts on it instead, to get the strength of a triangle. That single strut pre-dates the forces that modern gyro's can impart!

btw: What gyro are you going with on it?

- Michael

[DavidH]

The single strut boom support will work just fine. It is an aluminum boom on that heli.
I would also think it is a wire drive to the tail and not a torque tube.

The XL 60's that were kit number 1001 with the A frames all came with wire drive for the tail. Torque tube was an option. Modern gyros will work fine with the model if setup correctly.

I would hope that Ron would have a Futaba 153 or JR 130 gyro that he could stick in it. That is the gyro that would have been used in the model back when that model was available in 1992.

David

[JohnLund]

Ron upgraded his dragracer for IRCHA and passed down a FUTG601. It had a Futaba G153 on it though which I'll probably put on the .46 Graphite.

[Michael211]

David, I'm confused... why would you want to go with an older gyro dating back to the early 90's? Everything I've been told suggests that those things were a pain to fly with.

Also is there an advantage to the wire driven tail over a torque-tube driven tail? I was under the impression that most people preferred the torque-tube driven tail design. I actually have a 30 inch wire-driven tail tube (with the wire and whatever holds the wire in the tube) here I've been meaning to sell on Ebay... anybody wants it let me know!

I don't claim any 1st hand knowlege of those single-strut tail boom designs.... it just looks weak to me, from the pics. I don't see how it can give any side-to-side support for the boom.

Regards!

- Michael

[JohnLund]

I think he suggested the older gyro for period accuraccy. I flew a X-Cell gasser with one of those old rate gyros, it was a challenge

[DavidH]

Nope the gyros like the Futaba 153BB and JR 130 were not a pain to fly with. They worked very well. Just when HH gyros came out in 1997, it made it easier for pilots with lesser skills to do some stuff they could not do with the mechanical gyros. <G> I would guess if you gave over 95% of the pilots flying helis today a mechanical type gyro, they would have a hard time even hovering the heli without an HH type gyro. LOL

And yes John was correct. I was suggesting to use the Futaba 153 or JR 120 gyro, because that was what was available when heli was originally marketed.

David

[Michael211]

I can agree to disagree here but...

I think it'd be plain stupid to put a mechanical gyro on something you want to fly today. They were the best that was available... almost 20 years ago! They do not compare to the current generation of gyros... they're far less accurrate, far more prone to failure, and consume gobs of electricity. You'd have to be a glutton for punishment to put one of those gyro's on a bird you intend to actually fly!

I'd guess that if you gave most drivers a vehicle without power steering and power brakes and sent them on a 500 mile road trip, they'd probably hate it. That doesn't make them less skilled drivers though.

Of course, if you're just trying to build a static model with period accurracy then by all means go for it. LOL!

Oh and please be sure to get an AM radio system for it as well... just to keep the machine accurate with the time period in which it was originally released for sale. Maybe some ancient S-128 Futaba servos too.

OTOH, if you want the machine to fly well then put a good modern head-lock gyro on it, an engine govenor, and a good set of digital coreless servos (I prefer Futaba 9252's myself).

But that's just my opinion... I thought John was intending to fly this heli after all.

Regards!

- Michael

[Spawndn72]

The mechanical gyro's worked just fine for everything except backward flight and some of the mad 3d moves.
For standard flying (Loops, rolls, stall turns, etc) the old equipment works great.
My Xcell with 9201's and a JR 130 gyro flys just fine.